Series Thread: 2nd Round:Milwaukee Bucks vs Miami Heat

[tlance]

So the team which you just gave a 97% chance to lose is still the team to beat?
That makes absolutely no sense.

All the Bucks are as of this moment is a 1 seed who is down 3-0 to a team who has looked better than them throughout, and although I'm sure the Heat still respects them, they certainly don't fear them.

It makes perfect sense.

the team with the best record in the NBA is the team to beat until they are actually beaten. Which is what I have said from the start.

Last I checked, it takes 4 wins (not 3) to win a series.

So until the Heat finish the job and get that 4th win, the Bucks are the team to beat.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

It makes perfect sense.

the team with the best record in the NBA is the team to beat until they are actually beaten. Which is what I have said from the start.

Last I checked, it takes 4 wins (not 3) to win a series.

So until the Heat finish the job and get that 4th win, the Bucks are the team to beat.

No way. There is no logical argument to say that a team you just predicted had a 97% chance to lose is the team to beat.
Never in NBA history has a team come back from down 0-3.

The team with the best season regular recored earns HC advantage throughout the playoffs, which often times is a huge advantage.

Once that team loses game 1 or 2, that advantage is wiped out.

In this case, there was no HC advantage so being a higher seed, in essence meant nothing.

In this current series, the Heat up 3-0 is CLEARLY the favorite to advance and is the team to beat.

 

[GNG]

It makes perfect sense.

the team with the best record in the NBA is the team to beat until they are actually beaten. Which is what I have said from the start.

Last I checked, it takes 4 wins (not 3) to win a series.

So until the Heat finish the job and get that 4th win, the Bucks are the team to beat.

The Bucks are dead men walking.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

Miami Heat

-1600


324
Milwaukee Bucks

+900


@tlance
Current Vegas odds on series. I think the team that is a 16-1 favorite is the team to beat.

 

[tlance]

Miami Heat

-1600


324
Milwaukee Bucks

+900


@tlance
Current Vegas odds on series. I think the team that is a 16-1 favorite is the team to beat.

No.

You are asking me to reverse course on what I said before. I won’t do that.

The Bucks are the team to beat until someone beats them.

The Heat have not done that.

Yet.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

No.

You are asking me to reverse course on what I said before. I won’t do that.

The Bucks are the team to beat until someone beats them.

The Heat have not done that.

Yet.

So you are saying the exact same mindset you applied when Bucks were down 0-1 should be the same as when they are down 0-3?

You know that makes no sense. You're just being stubborn.

 

[trojanfan12]

No way. There is no logical argument to say that a team you just predicted had a 97% chance to lose is the team to beat.

It makes sense in the same way that the Raptors are still the defending champs until someone else actually wins the title.

It's more of a technicality at this point, but if the Bucks somehow manage to come back and win 4 straight...

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

It makes sense in the same way that the Raptors are still the defending champs until someone else actually wins the title.

It's more of a technicality at this point, but if the Bucks somehow manage to come back and win 4 straight...they'll still be the team to beat.

So when the Cavs lost LeBron and TT said Cavs were still the team to beat, you thought that it made sense?
It's one thing to still call the current champs the current champs, even though you know it's only until the next season ends. That's far different than saying the current champs are the team to beat, when you know they have no chance.


This isn't that hard. The team up 3-0 in a currently being played series is the team to beat 100% of the time.

 

[GNG]

The Heat will win this series.

 

[trojanfan12]

So when the Cavs lost LeBron and TT said Cavs were still the team to beat, you thought that it made sense?

In the East? Yes.

They were no longer the team to beat in the NBA because they had lost the title to the Warriors.

But they were still the Eastern Conference champs until the Raptors won the EC.

We're talking about technicalities.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

I

In the East? Yes.

They were no longer the team to beat in the NBA because they had lost the title to the Warriors.

But they were still the Eastern Conference champs until the Raptors won the EC.

We're talking about technicalities.

Two different things isn't a technicality.

Yes they were EC champs until they didn't even make the playoffs.

They were never in the same sentence as 'team to beat' once LeBron left.


This isn't that hard. The team up 3-0 in a currently being played series is the team to beat 100% of the time.

 

[tlance]

So you are saying the exact same mindset you applied when Bucks were down 0-1 should be the same as when they are down 0-3?

You know that makes no sense. You're just being stubborn.

It is exactly what I have said all along.

Down 3-0, down 1-0 or up 3-0

It is the same until the series is actually over.

 

[tlance]

So when the Cavs lost LeBron and TT said Cavs were still the team to beat, you thought that it made sense?
It's one thing to still call the current champs the current champs, even though you know it's only until the next season ends. That's far different than saying the current champs are the team to beat, when you know they have no chance.


This isn't that hard. The team up 3-0 in a currently being played series is the team to beat 100% of the time.

Totally different.

The Bucks proved they were the best team in the regular season and they made it to the ECF last year.

If the Cavs had won 60 games without LeBron, then they would have been the team to beat.

 

[trojanfan12]

Yes they were EC champs until they didn't even make the playoffs.

It's not 2 different things.

Yes, they were no longer the team to beat when they didn't make the playoffs and couldn't defend their title. When you win a championship, you are the champ until someone else wins it or you cannot defend your title.

This isn't that hard. The team up 3-0 in a currently being played series is the team to beat 100% of the time.

You're right, it's not. The champion is the team to beat until someone actually beats them. Assuming the Heat don't become the first team to blow a 3-0 lead, the Bucks will no longer be the team to beat. But until the Heat (or someone else) finishes them off, they are the team to beat.

 

[Wamu]

Funny people give LeBron shit for his FT woes yet nobody seems to have an issue with the fact Giannis is an even worse FT shooter.

LeBron- .734
Giannis- .722

Hypocrite much? Oh hell yeah.

 

[lebron23james]

It makes perfect sense.

the team with the best record in the NBA is the team to beat until they are actually beaten. Which is what I have said from the start.

Last I checked, it takes 4 wins (not 3) to win a series.

So until the Heat finish the job and get that 4th win, the Bucks are the team to beat.

LOL

Just admit your take was terrible. Why argue on some stupid technicality...Man up

 

[GNG]

Funny people give LeBron shit for his FT woes yet nobody seems to have an issue with the fact Giannis is an even worse FT shooter.

LeBron- .734
Giannis- .722

Hypocrite much? Oh hell yeah.

Giannis is a terrible outside shot. Keep him out of the paint and your chances of victory are good.

 

[GNG]

Totally different.

The Bucks proved they were the best team in the regular season and they made it to the ECF last year.

Any really good team doesn't choke at crunch time.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

It is exactly what I have said all along.

Down 3-0, down 1-0 or up 3-0

It is the same until the series is actually over.

You can keep saying it, and keep being wrong IMO. No team, ever, down 0-3 in a current series, is the team to beat.

The Bucks being the #1 seed means exactly what, as of today?

You gave the Heat a 97% chance to win.

You are saying the team you are almost certain will lose is the team to beat. It’s illogical.

 

[lebron23james]

Totally different.

The Bucks proved they were the best team in the regular season and they made it to the ECF last year.

If the Cavs had won 60 games without LeBron, then they would have been the team to beat.

You put too much stock in the regular season. One most teams don't try as hard. second, Miami beat Mill in the regular season too

You completely overated the bucks based on a great regular season, but that's all they were a regular season team that gets exposed in the playoffs. Giannis problem is he has been in the league for like 7 years now, and he still cant shoot for shit...In today's NBA, that is a death knell in the playoffs...Bigs don't control the game like they used to...You need range.

Giannis is easy to defend, unlike Lebron...back in 18 that you love to claim would have beaten lol